Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Cc: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net,
	"cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net"
	<cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>,
	bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Fwd: Poor TCP performance with ath10k in 4.0 kernel, again.
Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 15:33:59 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <555BBA57.3080402@candelatech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw6hj5_gDn-NzqJji_yP1YObwOyRE9FxPhpc9fR3YEPi9Q@mail.gmail.com>

On 05/19/2015 01:49 PM, Dave Taht wrote:
> ben, do you have packet captures?

I can get them easily enough...what scenario would you like
captured?  Files will be large, but I can upload them somewhere
and post a link.

> 
> What was the qdisc on the interface?

Default kernel qdisc...I think fifo-fast?

Thanks,
Ben

> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
> Date: Mon, May 18, 2015 at 2:27 PM
> Subject: Poor TCP performance with ath10k in 4.0 kernel, again.
> To: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
> ath10k <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>
> 
> 
> Disclosure: I am working with a patched 4.0 kernel, patched ath10k driver, and
> patched (CT) ath10k firmware.  Traffic generator is of our own making.
> 
> First, this general problem has been reported before, but the
> work-arounds previously suggested do not fully resolve my problems.
> 
> The basic issue is that when the sending socket is directly on top
> of a wifi interface (ath10k driver), then TCP throughput sucks.
> 
> For instance, if AP interface sends to station, with 10 concurrent
> TCP streams, I see about 426Mbps.  With 100 streams, I see total throughput
> of 750Mbps.  These were maybe 10-30 second tests that I did.
> 
> Interestingly, a single stream connection performs very poorly at first,
> but at least in one test, it eventually ran quite fast.  It is too
> complicated to describe in words, but the graph is here:
> 
> http://www.candelatech.com/downloads/single-tcp-4.0.pdf
> 
> The 10-stream test did not go above about 450Mbps even after running
> for more than
> 1 minute, and it was fairly stable around the 450Mbps range after the
> first few seconds.
> 
> 100-stream test shows nice stable aggregate throughput:
> 
> http://www.candelatech.com/downloads/100-tcp-4.0.pdf
> 
> I have tweaked the kernel tcp_limit_output_bytes setting
> (tested at 1024k too, did not make any significant difference).
> 
> # cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_limit_output_bytes
> 2048000
> 
> I have tried forcing TCP send/rcv buffers to be 1MB and 2MB, but that
> did not make obvious difference except that it started at the maximum
> rate very quickly instead of taking a few seconds to train up to full speed.
> 
> If I run a single-stream TCP test, sending on eth1 (Intel 1G NIC)
> through the AP machine, then single stream download is about 540 Mbps,
> and ramps up
> quickly.  So, the AP can definitely send the needed amount of TCP packets.
> 
> UDP throughput in download direction, single stream, is about 770Mbps,
> regardless
> of whether I originate the socket on the AP or if I pass it through the AP.
> send/recv bufs are set to 1MB for UDP sockets.
> 
> The 3.17 kernel shows similar behaviour, and the 3.14 kernel is a lot better
> for TCP traffic.
> 
> Are there tweaks other than tcp_limit_output_bytes that might
> improve this behaviour?
> 
> I will be happy to grab captures or provide any other debugging info
> that someone thinks will be helpful.
> 
> Thanks,
> Ben
> 
> --
> Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
> Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ath10k mailing list
> ath10k@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k
> 
> 


-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com


      reply	other threads:[~2015-05-19 22:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <555A5938.9080706@candelatech.com>
2015-05-19 20:49 ` Dave Taht
2015-05-19 22:33   ` Ben Greear [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/cerowrt-devel.lists.bufferbloat.net/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=555BBA57.3080402@candelatech.com \
    --to=greearb@candelatech.com \
    --cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    --cc=cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    --cc=dave.taht@gmail.com \
    --cc=make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox